Pauline Rea-Dickins

Mirror, mirror on the wall: identifying processes of classroom assessment

In a recent issue of Language Testing, Rea-Dickins and Gardner (2000) reported on their work in classroom-based assessment, and provided examples of different ways in which information from learner assessments was used by teachers working with learners for whom English is an additional/second language (EAL). The research reported here is also concerned with classroom assessment in an EAL school context. As in the previous article, it is presented from the perspective that issues of classroom assessment and, in particular, formative assessment require further detailed analysis. Using data from teacher interviews, classroom observations, video and audio recordings of learners, and lesson transcripts, the starting point for this investigation is the concept of the assessment cycle. Taking a grounded approach, it traces different stages in the teacher assessment process and presents a working model for the analysis of teacher decision making in relation to assessment practices. At the same time, it identifies classroom assessment as a multifaceted phenomenon with distinct identities linked to learning, teaching and bureaucratic functions.

Snares and silver bullets: disentangling the construct of formative assessment

This article explores the nature of formative assessment in a primary (elementary) language learning context. The research is situated in nine inner-city schools where an Early Years Intervention Project is being implemented to address problems of low levels of achievement in English, with specific reference to the language support of learners for whom English is an Additional Language.1 School-based assessment data are presented and analysed in relation to the construct of formative assessment. It is argued that the distinctions between formative and summative assessment are not as straightforward as sometimes portrayed and that the interplay between reliability and validity for purposes of class-based assessment is highly complex.

Understanding teachers as agents of assessment

Teaching involves assessment. In making decisions about lesson content and sequencing, about materials, learning tasks and so forth, teachers have to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the alternatives available to them. They make selections based on their experience, on their understandings of learning, language development and of language proficiency itself, together with what they consider to be most appropriate and in the best interests of those they teach. Equally, as part of their professional practice, they are always involved in the observation of their learners, which leads to the development of insights about learner progress and judgements about specific learning outcomes and overall performance. In my experience, however, when asked about classroom assessment, teachers will tell you first and foremost about the formal mechanisms that are in place to monitor language achievement, or about the specific assessment procedures that they use. There is a tendency to prioritize the ‘formal’ and the ‘procedural’ and to underplay the observation-driven approaches to assessment which is strongly in evidence in their everyday classroom practice, such as language sampling (see Gardner and Rea-Dickins, 2002; Rea-Dickins, 2002). This orientation, I suggest, is mirrored in much of our research in language testing and assessment as evidenced by work on language proficiency testing, the focus over time of sustained research. Assessment, with specific reference to teaching and learning in the language classroom, has remained, until recently, relatively unresearched. It is interesting to observe that the recent state-of-theart review (Alderson and Banerjee, 2001) did not include a separate section on either teacher assessment or classroom based assessment. It did, however, contain sub-sections on ‘alternative assessment’,

Teacher Assessment as Policy Instrument: Contradictions and Capacities.

Assessment has been at centre stage of educational reform in England and Wales in the past 15 years. This article argues that official educational assessment policy is essentially indifferent to the technical, pedagogic, and epistemological issues related to different forms of assessment. Policymakers are primarily concerned with “delivering” educational success in terms of reportable rising levels of attainment. The first part of this article provides a contextualized account of the use of assessment as an educational policy instrument and some of the consequences for pedagogy and curriculum provision. Our focal point here is on the assessment of English within the National Curriculum. The second section of the article amplifies our central argument—that policy is uninterested in the technical and educational issues involved in assessment—by offering a detailed critique of the limited and impoverished nature of the infrastructure and support available for teachers to carry out teacher assessment, with particular reference to the assessment of English for pupils whose first/home language is a language other than English. Research data are used to support our observations and arguments. We suggest that there is an urgent need to clarify the distinctions between summative and formative assessment, between the assessment of English as a first language and English as an Additional Language, and between a grammar-based view of English and a cross-curriculum discourse and communication-oriented view of English.

Young learners of modern foreign languages and their transition to the secondary phase: a lost opportunity?

Following publication of the National Languages Strategy on 18 December 2002 the teaching of foreign languages (FL) in the primary school is again high on the agenda in England as in other parts of Europe. Research has shown in the past (Burstall et al., 1974) that an early start in FL does not necessarily result in any long-term advantage in terms of proficiency. However, the above study also draws other conclusions, less widely reported, which remain significant. These include insufficient liaison between primary and secondary schools, lack of continuity in foreign language learning across phases, inadequate training of teachers, and a lack of differentiation by MFL secondary teachers. This article describes a small-scale research project which took place between April 2002 and May 2003. It sought to identify some of the main issues of transition from the perspective of the learners themselves, their foreign language teachers, heads of FL departments and head teachers at primary and secondary level. A complex and somewhat contradictory picture emerges from this study. On the one hand, there are many positive findings such as the enjoyment of languages and openness to other cultures and languages in the primary phase, greater oral fluency and confidence of learners when transferring to the secondary phase and enthusiasm shown for early language learning (ELL) by teachers in the primary and the secondary phase. On the other hand, opportunities which exist for building on primary language learning are largely wasted.

Large-scale Evaluations

In Part 2 in particular, we provided examples of evaluation studies undertaken for a variety of purposes that (i) reflected approaches and designs using different evaluation paradigms and (ii) drew on different constructs in applied linguistics research to inform the development of evaluation procedures. Several of those presented (e.g. chapters 5, 6, 7 and 8) were in fact examples of large-scale evaluations but there we did not analyse in any detail the criterial features or key facets of evaluations of this kind. In this chapter, we consider central evaluation decision-making points that may frame approaches and designs of large-scale studies.

Classroom-Based Assessment: Possibilities and Pitfalls

This chapter examines the possibilities and pitfalls of classroom-based English language assessment, drawing on both the language testing and classroom assessment literature in English language education as well as educational assessment more generally. The chapter opens with a brief overview of different contexts for language testing and assessment: external, classroom-based, and second language acquisition research. The second part of the chapter presents research findings that highlight different facets of classroom-based assessment: the different meanings of and purposes for assessment, relationships between formative and summative assessment, approaches and frameworks used in teacher assessment, teacher perceptions and implementation of assessment, and the extent to which conventional measurement paradigms are appropriate for assessing the worth of instructional embedded assessment. These research findings lead into a discussion of current concerns and issues, as well as some of the potential pitfalls associated with classroom-based assessment. The final part of the chapter outlines future directions for the field and highlights some of the challenges for both research and professional practice in relation to classroom-oriented assessment.

Assessment in early years language learning contexts

The teaching of one or more foreign languages is no longer restricted to the secondary school domain. In some countries a foreign language was introduced nationally into the primary curriculum as early as the 1960s (e.g., Sweden); elsewhere (e.g., Austria) this began on a very small scale. In another case, the teaching of a foreign language has had a somewhat chequered career, as with French in primary schools in England and Wales in the late 1960s and early 1970s (Burstall, 1974). However, as has been demonstrated unequivocally by Kubanek-German (1998), the teaching of foreign languages is now very much a part of national education policy in the European Union, as indeed elsewhere. In addition to these primary foreign language learning contexts, we have the widespread use of (predominantly) English as anadditional/secondlanguage for children in mainstream education in countries such as Australia, Britain, Canada and the United States of America. At this point it is useful to clarify some of the terminology used in this special issue and the differences in use across the different assessment contexts reported here. A range of terms is used in England and Wales, Australia, Canada and North America to refer to learners who are using English as the medium of instruction in school contexts but who are not English first language (L1) speakers. The term English as a Second Language (ESL) – used in Canada, North America and Australia – carries the same meaning as English as an Additional Language (EAL), which is the term now used in official documentation in England and Wales. In Australia and North America, reference is also made to learners with Limited English Proficiency (LEP). The convention adopted in this special issue is for authors to use the terminology as is the practice in their contexts of work. North American readers will also be more familiar with the

Themes and Challenges

Evaluation has many meanings in language programs. It is part of the novice teacher’s checklist to guide the development of initial lesson plans and teaching practice, a process of determining learning achievements or student satisfaction, and a dimension of the analysis of data in a formal evaluation or research study. It refers to judgements about students by teachers and by external assessors; the performance of teachers by their students, program managers and institutions; and programs, departments and institutions by internal assessors, external monitors and inspectors. Evaluation is about the relationships between different program components, the procedures and epistemologies developed by the people involved in programs, and the processes and outcomes which are used to show the value of a program — accountability — and enhance this value — development.

Current Research and Professional Practice: Reports of Work in Progress into the Assessment of Young Language Learners.

In all fields, only a limited proportion of activity is formally reported in journals and books. This is especially the case in the rapidly expanding area of primary foreign language teaching where there is, simultaneously, evidence of considerable innovation as well as a lack of clarity on some fundamental issues, as has been pointed out in the various articles in this issue. In spite of the lack of formal reporting in the area of assessment of young language learners, the field is active in several ways. In trying to answer some of the wider and more theoretical questions focused around the optimum age for starting a second or foreign language, whether there are actually benefits from an ‘early start’, or whether there are longer term effects from primary language learning experiences on student performance at secondary school, assessment of learner development and achievement plays an important part. This is equally true of second language acquisition and the analysis of the developmental paths to a new language in young children. In her account below, Renate Zangl describes the approaches taken to describe the development of young foreign language learners aged between six and 10, from both spontaneous speech samples and formal oral tests. There is also the role of policy development for assessment, with decision making at a macro level, and the development of appropriate strategies for professional practice. In connection with the important question as to whether learner achievement should be formally assessed at all (i.e. via graded learner performance) in the primary school, it is interesting that in numerous countries young foreign language learners are assessed (e.g., Dickson and Cumming, 1996) but that a national programme of teacher training in assessment does not necessarily follow on from this. By way of contrast, Norway has articulated a policy of no formal assessment of English within the early years curriculum, with no grades given in Years 1–7 (ages 6– 13), and this position has had a profound impact on the national strategy in this country for teacher professional development in classbased assessment of language learning. As we see in the article by